Actual game 13-10, down to the last play.
'Herm's dumb, he'd didn't turn the offense over to Brodie 'Brett Favrah' Croyle in his first start, . . . on the road, . . . against the SB champs. . . '

'Letting the new QB grow' isn't 'take this ball and chuck it.' It's getting him exposed the speed, the complexity, the rough and tumble, of the NFL.

Bitch all you want, . . . But everyone who's not a blind Herm hating PTSD Chiefs fan, ie the rest of the league's fans, are going to be talking about how Brodie had a promising start, the D is for real, and the team's looking better than most expected.

Hammock Parties

11-18-2007, 03:13 PM

I knew we wouldn't get blown out. No one listened to me, but I was right. This defense proved all the haters wrong today.

MIAdragon

11-18-2007, 03:13 PM

The team played great much better than expected BUT Herm lost this game, its simple really.

unothadeal

11-18-2007, 03:14 PM

I wish we got blown out.

Coach

11-18-2007, 03:15 PM

I knew we wouldn't get blown out. No one listened to me, but I was right. This defense proved all the haters wrong today.

Actual game 13-10, down to the last play.
'Herm's dumb, he'd didn't turn the offense over to Brodie 'Brett Favrah' Croyle in his first start, . . . on the road, . . . against the SB champs. . . '

'Letting the new QB grow' isn't 'take this ball and chuck it.' It's getting him exposed the speed, the complexity, the rough and tumble, of the NFL.

Bitch all you want, . . . But everyone who's not a blind Herm hating PTSD Chiefs fan, ie the rest of the league's fans, are going to be talking about how Brodie had a promising start, the D is for real, and the team's looking better than most expected.

wow cause the rest of the league talking about us. .will get us to the playoffs . .oh no thats right we have to actually win games to make the playoffs. . not just have the rest of the league talk about us. . this team is a joke .. they suck . . our defense is good until it matters as always. . and our offense is never good

Sure-Oz

11-18-2007, 03:17 PM

Our team is going for the Ravens offense records

Mecca

11-18-2007, 03:18 PM

Considering the Colts are a shell right now, you shouldn't expect them to blow anyone out.

The defense played pretty well but lets factor in how many really horrid guys Indy had to play like starters....such as a 5th string tackle..and Thorpe.

Gonzo

11-18-2007, 03:18 PM

Absolutely. The kid did great, most passes were high percentage but when he set his feet and threw the ball down field, he was more accurate than I expected.

Thig Lyfe

11-18-2007, 03:18 PM

'Letting the new QB grow' isn't 'take this ball and chuck it.'

It also isn't running draw plays every f*cking down.

The Bad Guy

11-18-2007, 03:19 PM

It's because most of the membership has down syndrome.

This place has gone to complete and utter shit over the last 2 years.

teedubya

11-18-2007, 03:19 PM

I feel for the defense of 2007, the same sorrow I felt for the 2003 offense. Exactly.

Silock

11-18-2007, 03:19 PM

No one listened to me, but I was right.

You said we would win. We didn't.

cdcox

11-18-2007, 03:19 PM

It's like you are a small business going against a large company on a contract. You don't think you have a chance. But the initial meeting goes well. The client is a little unhappy with the big boys and thinks it might be wise to spread some of its business around. They like you. They think they might go with you. But the deadline comes and goes and you never submit your proposal.

Nothing there to be happy about.

Tribal Warfare

11-18-2007, 03:20 PM

Bitch all you want, . . . But everyone who's not a blind Herm hating PTSD Chiefs fan, ie the rest of the league's fans, are going to be talking about how Brodie had a promising start, the D is for real, and the team's looking better than most expected.

KC played well, but offensive play-calling F*CKED the team over.

blueballs

11-18-2007, 03:20 PM

Nice- Mecca shows up AFTER the game is lost
to be the worthless prick he is

BigRock

11-18-2007, 03:21 PM

This place is a f'ing embarrassment.

jjchieffan

11-18-2007, 03:21 PM

It was a good game. We held Peyton and co. to 1 TD and 14 total points despite turning the ball over on their end of the field. I would have liked to have seen a W, but I am not upset by any means. Croyle had e decent first start. 1 Td 0 int. Granted, the play calling was too conservative, but we saw reason for optimism today. Croyle looked soooo much better than Huard. Next week, at home against the faders, we will see a more aggressive game plan. I hope anyway.

Bob Dole

11-18-2007, 03:23 PM

KC played well, but offensive play-calling F*CKED the team over.

Hey now. If SF can score more than 31 points against the Lambs, we'll lead the NFL in fewest points scored per game.

unothadeal

11-18-2007, 03:23 PM

You got a mouse in your pocket?
What?

dirk digler

11-18-2007, 03:23 PM

Considering the Colts are a shell right now, you shouldn't expect them to blow anyone out.

The defense played pretty well but lets factor in how many really horrid guys Indy had to play like starters....such as a 5th string tackle..and Thorpe.

Yep. The Colts had like 8 starters out and 4 on the O-Line. If the Colts would have been at full strength they would have won by at least 20+

Bearcat

11-18-2007, 03:24 PM

You're exactly right...
The D was great, and Croyle showed promise.

Those are two things to be really excited about... and if, next year, when Croyle has some starts under his belt and if the OLine is better, we play for the win tied 10-10, then all of us "blind Herm haters" can go eat shit.

But, OTOH, the NFL isn't about moral victories... regardless of who was in the game and who had diapers on, we had a chance to win the game; and I had no faith that Herm/Solari would do something about it. Does that mean airing it out? No. It means running more than screens and draws, which they did with success, and then went away from it.

Herm's quote says it all... they were hoping for a play at the end, and didn't get it.. which gives me no faith that in a year or two, when we have more talent on offense and we're in another defensive battle, that we'll go for the win.

Baby Lee

11-18-2007, 03:24 PM

OMFG, now the Colts are a scrub team. . .

You guys need to seek professional help, there's a strain of schizophrenia bubbling to the surface.

Putting Brodie in as starter meant growing pains. As growing pains go, today was pretty effing sweet. Brodie had a bunch of off passes early, he fumbled, Kennison fumbled. Next thing you know, the O-line's actually holding up for a moment, Brodie's throwing better, and quicker. The D held up. Lots of positives for a team starting a new era at QB.

Now all you shitwits are wishing we had 'best chance to win today and hopefully limping into a wildcard road game' Captain Downfield and his Wobble launcher.

PatsWin2002

11-18-2007, 03:24 PM

I was pulling for you guys. You probably win that one at Arrowhead, eh?

Mecca

11-18-2007, 03:25 PM

Dude take 8 starters off any team and it completely changes what they are.....

On offense today the Colts were missing a ton of guys. Pull 8 guys off the Chiefs defense you think it's even remotely the same?

dirk digler

11-18-2007, 03:26 PM

OMFG, now the Colts are a scrub team. . .

You guys need to seek professional help, there's a strain of schizophrenia bubbling to the surface.

Putting Brodie in as starter meant growing pains. As growing pains go, today was pretty effing sweet. Brodie had a bunch of off passes early, he fumbled, Kennison fumbled. Next thing you know, the O-line's actually holding up for a moment, Brodie's throwing better, and quicker. The D held up. Lots of positives for a team starting a new era at QB.

Now all you shitwits are wishing we had 'best chance to win today and hopefully limping into a wildcard road game' Captain Downfield and his Wobble launcher.

They aren't scrub team but they had a ton of starters out and we still couldn't beat them.

|Zach|

11-18-2007, 03:26 PM

Couldn't agree more with this thread.

This entire place is clown shoes.

The Bad Guy

11-18-2007, 03:26 PM

Considering the Colts are a shell right now, you shouldn't expect them to blow anyone out.

The defense played pretty well but lets factor in how many really horrid guys Indy had to play like starters....such as a 5th string tackle..and Thorpe.

Right on cue.

You're right. The Chiefs were totally healthy.

Their 3rd string RB played most of the game.

A rookie QB played had his first NFL start.

HolmeZz

11-18-2007, 03:28 PM

Mecca needs to leave and never come back. His schtick is old and he looks like a girl.

Chiefnj2

11-18-2007, 03:29 PM

the rest of the league's fans, are going to be talking about how Brodie had a promising start, the D is for real, and the team's looking better than most expected.

The rest of the league doesn't give a crap about the Chiefs.

cdcox

11-18-2007, 03:30 PM

Now all you shitwits are wishing we had 'best chance to win today and hopefully limping into a wildcard road game' Captain Downfield and his Wobble launcher.

Who said anything about playing that idiot? You can play Croyle, really let him play, and take what it gives you.

Iowanian

11-18-2007, 03:30 PM

I'm encouraged after this game.

I've said it all along....I knew before this season started that the Oline wasn't going to be good, that it was/should be a rebuilding year.

It doesn't bother me NEARLY as much to see Niswanger whiff a block as it does Welbourne.....because he actually could have an upside.

I spent the first half scooping dirt, listening on the radio, so I didn't "see" it.

I was very encouraged by Croyle's play when they actually let him throw the ball. No doubt in my mind he's an upgrade as he made Throws that Huard couldn't dream of making today.

The Defense played great, the Young QB still shows promise.....and the coach is a lot more conservative than I wish he would have been.

You don't win making turnovers herm....but you don't win forfeiting at the end either.

I'm on an even keil.....this was a building block game. Get the young guys in, and keep them in.

Sandy Eggo and oakland both lost too.....a loss by Denver monday night and the Chiefs are still one game out.

Mecca

11-18-2007, 03:31 PM

Ah yes there it is......I'm a bad guy because I pointed out that the Colts have tons of guys injured.

Fine the Chiefs shutdown the superbowl Champs......It was the same team out there!

Iowanian

11-18-2007, 03:32 PM

no...you're just a huard loving dumbass.

Baby Lee

11-18-2007, 03:32 PM

The rest of the league doesn't give a crap about the Chiefs.
I'm not pretending there's a brushfire of commentary in the offing.
My point is, ask them about what they saw, and that's gonna be their consensus.
And when you direct the average fan to our panoply of 'I've never been more pissed and disappointed in my life' posts on here, and they're gonna say 'you guys have some dumb assed fans.'

banyon

11-18-2007, 03:33 PM

Colts were banged up, whether Mecca or anyone said it. Our D still played awfully well, which I think I heard Mecca say.

Bearcat

11-18-2007, 03:34 PM

Putting Brodie in as starter meant growing pains. As growing pains go, today was pretty effing sweet. Brodie had a bunch of off passes early, he fumbled, Kennison fumbled. Next thing you know, the O-line's actually holding up for a moment, Brodie's throwing better, and quicker. The D held up. Lots of positives for a team starting a new era at QB.

Yes, but why do you put the diapers back on Croyle, when he's already driven once for a touchdown? That was a nice drive.. it's 10-10. If he goes downfield and throws a pick (I'm sure some people would complain), it's the growing pains you're talking about. If you go into a shell and say after the game that "we were hoping to make a play at the end", you're telling Peytong freakin' Manning to go out and win the game for the Colts.

Spineless is spineless, regardless of the talent on the field.

Mecca

11-18-2007, 03:34 PM

Uh are you talking to me....because if you are ever implying that I remotely said anything nice about Damon Huard that is totally wrong.

Skip Towne

11-18-2007, 03:34 PM

Did anybody see all those INT's GoChiefs told us Brodie would throw?

Coach

11-18-2007, 03:34 PM

Did anybody see all those INT's GoChiefs told us Brodie would throw?
Oh yeah, he's so the next Ryan Leaf!

Mecca

11-18-2007, 03:34 PM

Colts were banged up, whether Mecca or anyone said it. Our D still played awfully well, which I think I heard Mecca say.

That is basically exactly what I said...

It ain't good enough since it came from me though I guess.

HolmeZz

11-18-2007, 03:35 PM

Ah yes there it is......I'm a bad guy because I pointed out that the Colts have tons of guys injured!

I want you to name all those important injured players. All of'em, since they all played a part in the outcome.

cdcox

11-18-2007, 03:37 PM

I'm not pretending there's a brushfire of commentary in the offing.
My point is, ask them about what they saw, and that's gonna be their consensus.
And when you direct the average fan to our panoply of 'I've never been more pissed and disappointed in my life' posts on here, and they're gonna say 'you guys have some dumb assed fans.'

I'm not pissed off about today or even disappointed. I expect this crap from Herm. He'll never get over it.

Hammock Parties

11-18-2007, 03:37 PM

You said we would win. We didn't.

No I didn't. I said I had a FEELING that we would win. I didn't say for absolute sure that we would win. I didn't expect it. I picked us to lose 23-13...they exceeded my expectations.

doomy3

11-18-2007, 03:38 PM

This thread is dead on right.

ChiefsCountry

11-18-2007, 03:38 PM

I want you to name all those important injured players. All of'em, since they all played a part in the outcome.

Marvin Harrison
Tony Ugoh
Dwight Freeney
Booger McFarland

EPodolak

11-18-2007, 03:39 PM

OMFG, now the Colts are a scrub team. . .

You guys need to seek professional help, there's a strain of schizophrenia bubbling to the surface.

Putting Brodie in as starter meant growing pains. As growing pains go, today was pretty effing sweet. Brodie had a bunch of off passes early, he fumbled, Kennison fumbled. Next thing you know, the O-line's actually holding up for a moment, Brodie's throwing better, and quicker. The D held up. Lots of positives for a team starting a new era at QB.

Now all you shitwits are wishing we had 'best chance to win today and hopefully limping into a wildcard road game' Captain Downfield and his Wobble launcher.

Dude...the Bolts beat them at home last week; the Colts are without several key starters, it was a winnable game. Don't let the folks who made bad decisions off the hook so easily. Some of us are closer to the great beyond and would like to see some results from the "five year plan" in our own lifetimes. We have a right to bitch when the signs point to more of the same.

Taco John

11-18-2007, 03:40 PM

Gotta agree with the thread starter... I came away from that game with more respect for the Chiefs than I had going into it.

HolmeZz

11-18-2007, 03:40 PM

Marvin Harrison
Tony Ugoh
Dwight Freeney
Booger McFarland

And two of those would have no effect on how our defense played. The Colts still had a legendary quarterback, a pro bowl running back, and one of the best receivers in the league. And they got dominated.

blueballs

11-18-2007, 03:42 PM

Dallas Clark back meant nothing to Manning of course

HolmeZz

11-18-2007, 03:42 PM

Gotta agree with the thread starter... I came away from that game with more respect for the Chiefs than I had going into it.

Anybody who watched that game should've been impressed with what the Chiefs defense was able to do to their offense. I'd never seen Manning pressured and running for his life like that. We made him look like a bad quarterback for most of that game.

NUMBER7

11-18-2007, 03:42 PM

Marvin Harrison
Tony Ugoh
Dwight Freeney
Booger McFarland

Also JA went against a 3rd stringer today. The Dolts were beat up at home and still beat us...blame it all on Solari, Herm and the O line. The system sucks time to fix it.
:banghead:

banyon

11-18-2007, 03:42 PM

And two of those would have no effect on how our defense played. The Colts still had a legendary quarterback, a pro bowl running back, and one of the best receivers in the league. And they got dominated.

Sure they would've. They easily could've forced us into worse field position or caused a turnover, or kept our D on the field longer after forcing the O off the field.

doomy3

11-18-2007, 03:43 PM

Don't forget we were missing LJ. That is probably a bigger blow than anyone they were missing in this game.

Mecca

11-18-2007, 03:43 PM

Um they lost both their tackles.....they had their 5th OT playing LT...their RG was playing RT.

Personally I think the biggest ****up was the defense standing around on 4th down like they wouldn't snap it then Manning sneaking it...

Actual game 13-10, down to the last play.
'Herm's dumb, he'd didn't turn the offense over to Brodie 'Brett Favrah' Croyle in his first start, . . . on the road, . . . against the SB champs. . . '

'Letting the new QB grow' isn't 'take this ball and chuck it.' It's getting him exposed the speed, the complexity, the rough and tumble, of the NFL.

Bitch all you want, . . . But everyone who's not a blind Herm hating PTSD Chiefs fan, ie the rest of the league's fans, are going to be talking about how Brodie had a promising start, the D is for real, and the team's looking better than most expected.
this thread is effing hilarious

some people can't tell the difference between statements made in the global sense and statements made about specific events!

frickin' Lawyers!!!

HolmeZz

11-18-2007, 03:44 PM

Sure they would've. They easily could've forced us into worse field position or caused a turnover, or kept our D on the field longer after forcing the O off the field.

We put our defense in bad field position twice and they responded. Try again.

dirk digler

11-18-2007, 03:44 PM

I want you to name all those important injured players. All of'em, since they all played a part in the outcome.

So both of their LT's were out, their starting WR, Ryan Diem played 1 quarter he has been injured

They were a shell of their team even from a 3-4 weeks ago

HolmeZz

11-18-2007, 03:45 PM

Sure they would've. They easily could've forced us into worse field position or caused a turnover, or kept our D on the field longer after forcing the O off the field.

We put our defense in bad field position twice and they responded. Try again.

the Talking Can

11-18-2007, 03:46 PM

I'm thrilled Edwards would rather lose than take a risk.

Dungy is a dork. Edwards is the shiznit,

banyon

11-18-2007, 03:46 PM

We put our defense in bad field twice and they responded. Try again.

Try what again? I'm just saying that Freeney and McFarland could've impacted the way our D played.

They could've put us in bad field position 4 or 5 times instead of two.

doomy3

11-18-2007, 03:46 PM

Marvin Harrison
Tony Ugoh
Dwight Freeney
Booger McFarland

Has McFarland even been on their team this year at all???

Chiefnj2

11-18-2007, 03:48 PM

I'm not pretending there's a brushfire of commentary in the offing.
My point is, ask them about what they saw, and that's gonna be their consensus.
And when you direct the average fan to our panoply of 'I've never been more pissed and disappointed in my life' posts on here, and they're gonna say 'you guys have some dumb assed fans.'

If they know anything about Herm Edwards they are going to laugh and say "He played not to lose again, didn't he? Sucks for you."

HolmeZz

11-18-2007, 03:49 PM

Try what again? I'm just saying that Freeney and McFarland could've impacted the way our D played.

They could've put us in bad field position 4 or 5 times instead of two.

The defense played well and continued to play well even when put in bad field position. What are you even trying to argue? You're like trying to come up with hypotheticals where our defense could've played badly.

doomy3

11-18-2007, 03:49 PM

Apparently, we should point out that the Chiefs didn't have their starting RG Will Shields or their starting LT Willie Roaf if we are including a guy being out for the Colts that didn't even make it through training camp with them this year in McFarland.

banyon

11-18-2007, 03:52 PM

The defense played well and continued to play well even when put in bad field position. What are you even trying to argue? You're like trying to come up with hypotheticals where our defense could've played badly.

it's a semantic argument that really isn't worth the time to make.

The playcalling is wayyy more important right now.

munkey

11-18-2007, 03:54 PM

If they know anything about Herm Edwards they are going to laugh and say "He played not to lose again, didn't he? Sucks for you."

LOL

So true..

I don't understand why people here except this crap..Maybe the same idiot's that by season tickets every year...RIGHT?

This is getting so F'ing old...So when are we going to the super bowl now? I'm sure someone here can tell me.

Delano

11-18-2007, 03:59 PM

Any other week, and our offensive line is third string talent on Indianapolis' squad. Why is this week different Mecca?

They have a shitty O-line, but so do we.

Turns out, it was a fairly even match up, all things considered, with the exception of QB and RB.

It was much closer than I thought and that is what hurts. That hurt is offset by Brodie's play and the direction of the team.

You really can't blame Herm. If Colquitt punts like he is usually capable of, and Raynor hits his field goals, we probably win. His field goal position, defensive battle is probably not what is called for against the Colts, but it nearly worked for him this time.

Mecca

11-18-2007, 04:00 PM

LOL

So true..

I don't understand why people here except this crap..Maybe the same idiot's that by season tickets every year...RIGHT?

This is getting so F'ing old...So when are we going to the super bowl now? I'm sure someone here can tell me.

Because most people have for years.....if they didn't Carl would have been gone years ago and the stadium wouldn't be full.

In this town if you are just ok or have a chance people think it's good enough.....notice how much the Royals attendance was up in a year where they were a couple games over 500.

|Zach|

11-18-2007, 04:01 PM

LOL

So true..

I don't understand why people here except this crap..Maybe the same idiot's that by season tickets every year...RIGHT?

This is getting so F'ing old...So when are we going to the super bowl now? I'm sure someone here can tell me.
except what?

Mecca

11-18-2007, 04:02 PM

Any other week, and our offensive line is third string talent on Indianapolis' squad. Why is this week different Mecca?

They have a shitty O-line, but so do we.

Turns out, it was a fairly even match up, all things considered, with the exception of QB and RB.

It was much closer than I thought and that is what hurts. That hurt is offset by Brodie's play and the direction of the team.

You really can't blame Herm. If Colquitt punts like he is usually capable of, and Raynor hits his field goals, we probably win. His field goal position, defensive battle is probably not what is called for against the Colts, but it nearly worked for him this time.

When they're starters play they are obviously better but yes today they were about the same. I wasn't saying anything different than that.

All I said was don't act like the defense shut down a full strength Colts team because it wasn't even close to that.

Coach

11-18-2007, 04:06 PM

When they're starters play they are obviously better but yes today they were about the same. I wasn't saying anything different than that.

All I said was don't act like the defense shut down a full strength Colts team because it wasn't even close to that.

Valid point, but look back to last years playoff game. While the offense didn't do much, they were a full strength team. If they were healthy, I would bet the Colts would put up at least from 13 to 20 points, like last year.

The defense isn't really the big problem. It's the offense, along with the offensive coaches, that's the problem.

HolmeZz

11-18-2007, 04:07 PM

I'm sure you were here beforehand predicting we'd win, Mecca.

MyChiefConcern

11-18-2007, 04:15 PM

The offensive philosophy of Herman Edwards cost this team the game today, against an undermanned Colts squad.

It's really not that difficult. The "O" opens up in the second half for a brief window, in response to a Colts TD, and we score. The D gets a big stop, Herm's asshole puckers up tight on the next drive, and the game is over.

I mean, Peyton Manning can lead a game winning drive with 7 minutes on the clock? Who would have thought? It's not like he's one of the best QB's in NFL history or anything.

Jesus Christ.

Mecca

11-18-2007, 04:16 PM

Valid point, but look back to last years playoff game. While the offense didn't do much, they were a full strength team. If they were healthy, I would bet the Colts would put up at least from 13 to 20 points, like last year.

The defense isn't really the big problem. It's the offense, along with the offensive coaches, that's the problem.

They tend to fold in key moments.....

Nothing tops standing around thinking Manning isn't taking a snap so he can sneak it for a first and end the game.

Bearcat

11-18-2007, 04:17 PM

The offensive philosophy of Herman Edwards cost this team the game today, against an undermanned Colts squad.

It's really not that difficult. The "O" opens up in the second half for a brief window, in response to a Colts TD, and we score. The D gets a big stop, Herm's asshole puckers up tight on the next drive, and the game is over.

I mean, Peyton Manning can lead a game winning drive with 7 minutes on the clock? Who would have thought? It's not like he's one of the best QB's in NFL history or anything.

Nothing tops standing around thinking Manning isn't taking a snap so he can sneak it for a first and end the game.
Who was standing around?

Coach

11-18-2007, 04:20 PM

They tend to fold in key moments.....

Nothing tops standing around thinking Manning isn't taking a snap so he can sneak it for a first and end the game.

Shit, they fold quicker than my cheap lawnchair!

doomy3

11-18-2007, 04:22 PM

Oh, so now it's the defenses fault for "folding" and giving up 2 feet on a 4th and inches. Who would believe that someone might be able to run the ball and pick up inches? Our defense obviously wasn't trying.

Eleazar

11-18-2007, 04:23 PM

It's because most of the membership has down syndrome.

This place has gone to complete and utter shit over the last 2 years.

indeed

stevieray

11-18-2007, 04:24 PM

pathetic is a more fitting adjective...

Mecca

11-18-2007, 04:24 PM

Oh, so now it's the defenses fault for "folding" and giving up 2 feet on a 4th and inches. Who would believe that someone might be able to run the ball and pick up inches? Our defense obviously wasn't trying.

You guys need to seek professional help, there's a strain of schizophrenia bubbling to the surface.

Putting Brodie in as starter meant growing pains. As growing pains go, today was pretty effing sweet. Brodie had a bunch of off passes early, he fumbled, Kennison fumbled. Next thing you know, the O-line's actually holding up for a moment, Brodie's throwing better, and quicker. The D held up. Lots of positives for a team starting a new era at QB.

Now all you shitwits are wishing we had 'best chance to win today and hopefully limping into a wildcard road game' Captain Downfield and his Wobble launcher.

You're right. This was a good first game for the Chiefs with Croyle. Plenty to be optimistic about.

Bob Dole

11-18-2007, 04:25 PM

Any other week, and our offensive line is third string talent on Indianapolis' squad. Why is this week different Mecca?

They have a shitty O-line, but so do we.

Turns out, it was a fairly even match up, all things considered, with the exception of QB and RB.

It was much closer than I thought and that is what hurts. That hurt is offset by Brodie's play and the direction of the team.

You really can't blame Herm. If Colquitt punts like he is usually capable of, and Raynor hits his field goals, we probably win. His field goal position, defensive battle is probably not what is called for against the Colts, but it nearly worked for him this time.

Too bad a team needs a dependable kicker to successfully win with that philosophy.

Coach

11-18-2007, 04:26 PM

You're right. This was a good first game for the Chiefs with Croyle. Plenty to be optimistic about.

Sure, but if the Chiefs have won it, then there's plenty more to be optimistic about.

Our D played pretty well. So did our O, except for the play calling. Now that was sick.

ClevelandBronco

11-18-2007, 04:31 PM

Sure, but if the Chiefs have won it, then there's plenty more to be optimistic about.

Yeah, sure. But start him against the Jets if you want a sure win.

This was a strong showing against the SB champs. That's important to the Chiefs' (and Brodie's) development.

Priest4Prez

11-18-2007, 04:33 PM

Our D played pretty well. So did our O, except for the play calling. Now that was sick.
they play calling is only as good as the execution

Coach

11-18-2007, 04:34 PM

Yeah, sure. But start him against the Jets if you want a sure win.

This was a strong showing against the SB champs. That's important to the Chiefs' (and Brodie's) development.

I understand that, but it would show everybody more of what Brodie could had been capable in a 2 minute offense.

In fact, I'd like to point out, while Brodie was in the 4th quarters, most of them were in 2 minute drills, except for the Denver game, where Brodie had little to no problem on getting the ball down the field.

You see, whenever the Chiefs are tied or have a small lead, they are very very very conseritive. Yet, when they are behind, they open the playbook. Yet we wonder why one isn't working and the other is, yet the coaches don't see that?

ClevelandBronco

11-18-2007, 04:35 PM

I understand that, but it would show everybody more of what Brodie could had been capable in a 2 minute offense.

In fact, I'd like to point out, while Brodie was in the 4th quarters, most of them were in 2 minute drills, except for the Denver game, where Brodie had little to no problem on getting the ball down the field.

You see, whenever the Chiefs are tied or have a small lead, they are very very very conseritive. Yet, when they are behind, they open the playbook. Yet we wonder why one isn't working and the other is, yet the coaches don't see that?
Well, one "Coach" does.

Zouk

11-18-2007, 04:36 PM

They tend to fold in key moments.....

Nothing tops standing around thinking Manning isn't taking a snap so he can sneak it for a first and end the game.

I agree with you Mecca.

The play of the game was the Addai run that got them down to the 4. Derrick Johnson HAS to make that tackle. Ty Law obviously whiffed as well after that.

I also thought Gunther fell back to his normal position of over-blitzing with the game on the line. It really seemed like we were wasting players as Manning was able to see it and get the ball out quickly. I'm thinking particularly of the 11 yard pass to Wayne that was way too easy.

We were getting good pressure with our front 4 against their backup tackles. Why did we have to expose ourselves instead of just continuing to play solid?

And what's the story this season with Allen making all his plays in the 1st half and then disappearing in the 4th when we need him most?

irishjayhawk

11-18-2007, 04:37 PM

What about the people, like me, who actually thought the Chiefs would win going in?

Can I bitch at our ball-less coach and retarded O-Coordinator?

Mecca

11-18-2007, 04:39 PM

I agree with you Mecca.

The play of the game was the Addai run that got them down to the 4. Derrick Johnson HAS to make that tackle. Ty Law obviously whiffed as well after that.

I also thought Gunther fell back to his normal position of over-blitzing with the game on the line. It really seemed like we were wasting players as Manning was able to see it and get the ball out quickly. I'm thinking particularly of the 11 yard pass to Wayne that was way too easy.

We were getting good pressure with our front 4 against their backup tackles. Why did we have to expose ourselves instead of just continuing to play solid?

And what's the story this season with Allen making all his plays in the 1st half and then disappearing in the 4th when we need him most?

That play was ridiculous too, he rips off a 9 yard run getting away from Johnson juking Law out of his jock and essentially has no blocking while doing it.

Priest4Prez

11-18-2007, 04:39 PM

I thought that we were going to run a draw play with :03 left, but we ran that dump pass....

burt

11-18-2007, 04:39 PM

the play calling is only as good as the execution

bullshit, our O play calling is so predictable, we might as well invite their D into our huddle.

Bearcat

11-18-2007, 04:39 PM

You see, whenever the Chiefs are tied or have a small lead, they are very very very conseritive. Yet, when they are behind, they open the playbook. Yet we wonder why one isn't working and the other is, yet the coaches don't see that?

Yeah, I mentioned that in the game thread after we blew our first chance to take the lead, at the beginning of the 4th when it was 10-10. We might as well have let them get into field goal range at that point, so we could get the ball back down 13-10 or 17-10 and move the ball again.

It's part of the reason we beat SD and Minnesota, it's why we traded touchdowns with GB, and it's why we scored our one TD today. Why try to score when you aren't losing?

ClevelandBronco

11-18-2007, 04:41 PM

I agree with you Mecca.

The play of the game was the Addai run that got them down to the 4. Derrick Johnson HAS to make that tackle. Ty Law obviously whiffed as well after that...
Yes, but Vinatieri likely would have put the Colts ahead, regardless of that play (which was a brilliant piece of running).

The Chiefs would have been left with time, but who can say that would have mattered?

burt

11-18-2007, 04:41 PM

I thought that we were going to run a draw play with :03 left, but we ran that dump pass....

gee, we have 3 seconds to go....most of the field to go, ...let's run a dump pass that is worth 12 yards if done well. Solari sux.

doomy3

11-18-2007, 04:41 PM

I thought that we were going to run a draw play with :03 left, but we ran that dump pass....

And if Croyle holds the ball any longer, he is sacked and the game ends that way. At least we had a shot by getting the ball downfield with that play. Croyle barely had his drop on that play and had 4 DL in his face with everyone else back in coverage.

burt

11-18-2007, 04:42 PM

And if Croyle holds the ball any longer, he is sacked and the game ends that way. At least we barely had a shot by getting the ball downfield with that play. Croyle barely had his drop on that play and had 4 DL in his face with everyone else back in coverage.

fyp

Bearcat

11-18-2007, 04:43 PM

they play calling is only as good as the execution
To an extent... Croyle missed a couple of downfield passes in the first half, and that's fine. But a 5 yard loss on a first down run might, just might be because everyone in the stadium knows you're running it on first down, and not because of execution. I dunno, just a hunch. And if you don't throw for the first down...

doomy3

11-18-2007, 04:45 PM

fyp

And we would have barely had a chance if Croyle throws the ball as far as he can. What's your point? We are extremely limited in what we can call with this line. Bottom Line. And if you don't believe it, just look at the push 4 Down Linemen get against our 5 Linemen on a deep drop on the last play. We wouldn't have had time to throw a Hail Mary. Our line is dreadful, and as long as that holds true, our playcalling will be dreadful too.

By the way, I would love to know how the love affair in NY is going with Mangini. Haven't heard much from the Jets fans this season who were so pleased to get rid of Herm.

|Zach|

11-18-2007, 04:46 PM

Who was standing around?
*cough*

doomy3

11-18-2007, 04:47 PM

To an extent... Croyle missed a couple of downfield passes in the first half, and that's fine. But a 5 yard loss on a first down run might, just might be because everyone in the stadium knows you're running it on first down, and not because of execution. I dunno, just a hunch. And if you don't throw for the first down...

We threw on first down several times.

doomy3

11-18-2007, 04:48 PM

*cough*

Oh, he was speaking in generalities. Not necessarily today's game, but the season in general. LOL

Hammock Parties

11-18-2007, 04:50 PM

We threw on first down several times.

Barely. They scaled back the aggression today. We've been throwing more on first down over the last month, but today we went completely conservative to protect Croyle. It was dumb. They open it up with a noodle arm in the game, but not a gunslinger? Whatever.

headsnap

11-18-2007, 04:53 PM

We threw on first down several times.

our players excecuted

our OC should be excecuted

Hammock Parties

11-18-2007, 04:53 PM

We threw nine passes on first down today. Most of those were basically extended handoffs to Bowe with no route required.

We ran the ball 11 times on first down.

Looks good on paper, but really more like 16 runs and and 4 passes.

Bearcat

11-18-2007, 04:57 PM

We threw on first down several times.

If you count a wideout screen pass as a pass, then okay... but when you're a defensive lineman or linebacker, it's basically the same thing.

We passed to Gonzo once on 1st down, and a screen on 1st down. The others were runs.

We threw nine passes on first down today. Most of those were basically extended handoffs to Bowe with no route required.

We ran the ball 11 times on first down.

Looks good on paper, but really more like 16 runs and and 4 passes.

You just proved my point. It doesn't matter where the passes were, the argument here is that we ran on every first down, so the Colts knew we were going to run and that's why we lost 5 yards on that first down. Come on. We threw on almost half the first down plays we had! There is no reason Kolby Smith should lose 5 yards on a first down running play from the 45 yard line. Shouldn't happen. And to put all the blame on Herm/Solari for it when we threw on 9/20 first downs and just give a free pass to the players for not excecuting is just ignorant.

doomy3

11-18-2007, 05:00 PM

[QUOTE=Bearcat]If you count a wideout screen pass as a pass, then okay... but when you're a defensive lineman or linebacker, it's basically the same thing.

QUOTE]

Not really. Again, the argument here is that the D KNEW we were going to run, so they just send the LBs and D Linemen upfield immediately to stop the run, so that's why we lose those yards or can't run the ball.

That would be the exact opposite thing that a team would want to do against a screen especially.

We didn't make plays.

Hammock Parties

11-18-2007, 05:00 PM

You just proved my point. It doesn't matter where the passes were

Actually it does. You want the other team to play honest on first down. You do that by throwing a nice 20-yard pass down the seam to your tight end once in awhile, which we did quite a bit over the last few weeks with Huard playing.

Obviously this week they were way too scared Brodie might turn it over. We threw down the field only once or twice on first down this game. Pitiful.

I wish they had called the plays today as if Huard was playing quarterback. It might have been a different game.

Spott

11-18-2007, 05:02 PM

I'm glad we ditched Medlock... I bet he would have killed us today...

Well, even if he made those FG's the Colts would have got a TD on that last drive and won 17-16.

I'd also like to mention that Lawrence Tynes made all 3 of his FG attempts today.

Zouk

11-18-2007, 05:03 PM

Barely. They scaled back the aggression today. We've been throwing more on first down over the last month, but today we went completely conservative to protect Croyle. It was dumb. They open it up with a noodle arm in the game, but not a gunslinger? Whatever.

Arm strength is meaningless. It's all about the ability to read coverages quickly. The Colts are a very good pass D - fast and rangy, and they play mostly zone and never leave the deep stuff open. I bet they are top 5 in fewest deep completions against them.

Plus it's harder to pass protect on turf.

Bearcat

11-18-2007, 05:03 PM

Not really. Again, the argument here is that the D KNEW we were going to run, so they just send the LBs and D Linemen upfield immediately to stop the run, so that's why we lose those yards or can't run the ball.

That would be the exact opposite thing that a team would want to do against a screen especially.

We didn't make plays.

Not the screens we were throwing... the first down screens were one-step and throw. There was no letting the d-linemen go and throwing it over their heads, there was no setup of blockers, and no slot screens. When you're a defensive lineman or linebacker, and you know it's either a hand off or a bang-bang pass, there's no reason to not pin your ears back and get after the QB.

doomy3

11-18-2007, 05:04 PM

Not the screens we were throwing... the first down screens were one-step and throw. There was no letting the d-linemen go and throwing it over their heads, there was no setup of blockers, and no slot screens. When you're a defensive lineman or linebacker, and you know it's either a hand off or a bang-bang pass, there's no reason to not pin your ears back and get after the QB.

Yea, why would the LBs ever need to tackle a WR on a WR screen?

Bearcat

11-18-2007, 05:05 PM

Actually it does. You want the other team to play honest on first down. You do that by throwing a nice 20-yard pass down the seam to your tight end once in awhile, which we did quite a bit over the last few weeks with Huard playing.

Obviously this week they were way too scared Brodie might turn it over. We threw down the field only once or twice on first down this game. Pitiful.

I wish they had called the plays today as if Huard was playing quarterback. It might have been a different game.

Or they could have done exactly what Manning did in the 3rd... they threw several times to Addai over the middle. Set up some screens to Priest, get Gonzo some easy come-back routes over the middle. They put on a clinic on what we needed to do, yet we kept with our gameplan and never adjusted.

Hammock Parties

11-18-2007, 05:06 PM

Arm strength is meaningless.

ROFL

I'm not asking for a 40-yard bomb. Cover 2 has a hole down the middle. Why didn't we attempt to exploit that with Gonzalez?

Today's gameplan was THROW A QUICK PASS TO BOWE FOR FIVE YARDS HEY MAYBE HE'LL BREAK A TACKLE! NOW RUN FOR 2 YARDS! YES!

Bob Dole

11-18-2007, 05:06 PM

I agree with you Mecca.

The play of the game was the Addai run that got them down to the 4. Derrick Johnson HAS to make that tackle. Ty Law obviously whiffed as well after that.

They should have just let him score so we had time to play for overtime.

Bearcat

11-18-2007, 05:06 PM

Yea, why would the LBs ever need to tackle a WR on a WR screen?

Because no one is blocking the corner standing next to the WR :spock: That's my whole point... had we done some slot screens or something to get the LBs out of position, it would have helped.

doomy3

11-18-2007, 05:10 PM

Because no one is blocking the corner standing next to the WR :spock: That's my whole point... had we done some slot screens or something to get the LBs out of position, it would have helped.

You act as if the LBs don't ever make that tackle. How many times has Bowe broke the CB tackle, only to get tackled by the LB 5 yards later? That doesn't happen if the LBs can just "pin back their ears" and rush the QB like you say on a WR screen.

Doesn't really matter. We'll just argue in circles here. My point is, we should still be able to run the ball on first down effectively. Even if we ran it every time, which clearly we didn't. That is execution. There is never an excuse to lose 5 yards on a running play.

Zouk

11-18-2007, 05:11 PM

ROFL

I'm not asking for a 40-yard bomb. Cover 2 has a hole down the middle. Why didn't we attempt to exploit that with Gonzalez?

Today's gameplan was THROW A QUICK PASS TO BOWE FOR FIVE YARDS HEY MAYBE HE'LL BREAK A TACKLE! NOW RUN FOR 2 YARDS! YES!

Go do your film breakdown and post on the board the instances you saw Gonzalez open in the middle of the field.

You really think they were leaving Tony Gonzalez open? You really think cover 2 always = TE open 10 yards down the middle of the field? How would teams win Super Bowls with it if that were true? They obviously tweaked their coverages to account for our best player.

Hammock Parties

11-18-2007, 05:14 PM

Go do your film breakdown and post on the board the instances you saw Gonzalez open in the middle of the field.

Do you know how many times I saw Gonzalez run five yards up the field, stop and turn around today?

We made almost no effort to throw down the field. A couple times on bootlegs Brodie was looking deep, but it was covered up.

I'm not asking the Chiefs to become the Bengals. But a few throws past the sticks would be nice.

Zouk

11-18-2007, 05:15 PM

Do you know how many times I saw Gonzalez run five yards up the field, stop and turn around today?

We made almost no effort to throw down the field. A couple times on bootlegs Brodie was looking deep, but it was covered up.

I'm not asking the Chiefs to become the Bengals. But a few throws past the sticks would be nice.

I saw many times Brodie looked for the deep ball and pulled it back. The Colts are a great coverage team, and we still have only Bowe and Gonzalez. Kennison is finished, and Parker never was. Another wideout is a must have this offseason.

Bearcat

11-18-2007, 05:20 PM

You act as if the LBs don't ever make that tackle. How many times has Bowe broke the CB tackle, only to get tackled by the LB 5 yards later? That doesn't happen if the LBs can just "pin back their ears" and rush the QB like you say on a WR screen.

Doesn't really matter. We'll just argue in circles here. My point is, we should still be able to run the ball on first down effectively. Even if we ran it every time, which clearly we didn't. That is execution. There is never an excuse to lose 5 yards on a running play.

When it's one step and throw, it doesn't do much for getting the LBs out of position.

Eh... I just don't think a football team should reduce 1st down to a few plays, especially in the 4th when they had just had a good drive for a touchdown. As far as a 5 yard loss, I agree that the defender shouldn't be able to meet the RB at the handoff... it's never 100% playcalling, just like it's never 100% execution.

KC Tattoo

11-18-2007, 05:21 PM

I'm just happy today that Brodie played and he looked good. The play calling was sucklage. I think they left alot of points or could have had more long drives if we would just PASS ON FIRST DOWN!! The first down pass plays to D Bowe were more like extended hand offs. The Colts figured it out too.

I am exited for Brodie. He will get better and I pray that they will start opening up the play book for him. We have nothing to lose at this point just learn and get better. I didn't agree with the play calling, I think they wanted to ease Brodie along in his first game. I think Brodie could have had a big day if they just let him play.

If Brodie started the season we would have a dynamite team at this point. If Brodie started a few games ago he would have been prepared today to beat the Colts. I am very upset that we waisted half the season with Huard. But now I am finally happy that Brodie gets his start.

Bearcat

11-18-2007, 05:22 PM

I'm not asking the Chiefs to become the Bengals. But a few throws past the sticks would be nice.
Our agreement on this stuff is kind of creepy.

banyon

11-18-2007, 05:23 PM

*cough*

I replied.

Thig Lyfe

11-18-2007, 05:41 PM

Arm strength is meaningless.

Tell that to Chad Pennington.

Zouk

11-18-2007, 05:42 PM

Tell that to Chad Pennington.

You mean the guy who's won division titles and road playoff games?

cdcox

11-18-2007, 05:45 PM

Arm strength is meaningless. It's all about the ability to read coverages quickly. The Colts are a very good pass D - fast and rangy, and they play mostly zone and never leave the deep stuff open. I bet they are top 5 in fewest deep completions against them.

Plus it's harder to pass protect on turf.

Judging by head movement, Croyle reads defenses much faster then Huard.

Coach

11-18-2007, 05:46 PM

You mean the guy who's won division titles and road playoff games?

When he was good yes. Now he isn't worth a shit.

teedubya

11-18-2007, 05:50 PM

We threw nine passes on first down today. Most of those were basically extended handoffs to Bowe with no route required.

We ran the ball 11 times on first down.

Looks good on paper, but really more like 16 runs and and 4 passes.

We ran on first down of the drive 8 times.

cdcox

11-18-2007, 05:52 PM

When he was good yes. Now he isn't worth a shit.

Pennington was never "good". Even in 2002 you could see that his arm could not make all the throws and that it would be easy for NFL defenses to stop him since they did not have to cover all the field. The Raiders owned him in that 2002 playoff game. Building a team around him was destined to fail.

Hammock Parties

11-18-2007, 06:01 PM

Pennington was never "good". Even in 2002 you could see that his arm could not make all the throws and that it would be easy for NFL defenses to stop him since they did not have to cover all the field. The Raiders owned him in that 2002 playoff game. Building a team around him was destined to fail.

Now Herm has a quarterback who can make all the throws.

Problem is...HE WON'T LET HIM!!!

Hammock Parties

11-18-2007, 06:02 PM

We ran on first down of the drive 8 times.

First down period...not just the first play of the drive.

Zouk

11-18-2007, 06:15 PM

Now Herm has a quarterback who can make all the throws.

Problem is...HE WON'T LET HIM!!!

His first game on the road in a loud dome with lousy tackles.

Be patient and wait until next year. I saw what you wrote in the Posnanski thread this morning, and will remember it even if you won't.